Hays and Macdonald v Sony  847 F.2d 412; 1988 U.S. App.

     This was one of the few cases I could find that specifically dealt with the academic exception at a high school level. 

     Hays and MacDonald were two high school business teachers who developed a handbook for a word processor that the high school owned.  They distributed the handbook to the staff and students of the high school.  When the high school purchased new word processors from Sony, the school gave the handbook to Sony asking them to adapt it for the new word processors.  Sony did so by taking large parts of the document and copying it into the new handbook.  Sony then gave it back to the school at no charge.  When Hays and MacDonald found out about the new handbooks they sued Sony for copyright infringement arguing that they owned the rights to the handbook.  The District Court found for Sony.  Hays and MacDonald tried to appeal the decision but they filed their appeal to late.  The Appeals Court thus denied their appeal and they lost their case.  However in issuing the denial the Appeals Court discussed the case in more depth, exploring the issues as if the case had been heard.  They argued that that since Sony didn’t make any direct profits from the handbook there would have been no damages to be awarded based on the arguments made by the plaintiffs.  However the court did say that it appeared that Hays and MacDonald were the rightful owners of copyright and so might have been entitled to an injunction.  They also discussed the nature of the work for hire clause of the 1976 Copyright Act.  They said that although it appears to have eliminated the academic exception there seems to have been no intent by Congress to do so and therefore if another case came before this Appeals Circuit they might be inclined to uphold the academic exception.

     This case relates very well to Mauro v Allentown.  Both occur at the high school level, and both deal with teachers preparing works beyond the basic scope of the classroom.  The fact that this case ended with a denial of appeal makes drawing any concrete conclusions from it more difficult, but it does appear that if Mr. Mauro did proceed with his case his might be able to receive an injunction to prevent the high school from performing his work without his permission.